Podcasts about plaintiffs

The Lawyer Stories Podcast Episode 223 features Charles Porges, Co-Founder and CEO of Novo, a legal tech company revolutionizing how plaintiff attorneys write medical chronologies and demands with artificial intelligence.  Novo's technology automates this process, empowering attorneys to draft high-quality documents in minutes — compared to days if done conventionally — ultimately saving valuable time and resources. Novo's AI-powered platform analyses and parses client documents to extract the most relevant information, reducing the burden of administrative tasks and freeing up attorneys to focus on strategic work. Novo is the personal injury settlement engine, reshaping the legal industry. 

In this case, the court considered this issue: Can a plaintiff state a claim under ERISA's provision prohibiting a plan fiduciary from knowingly engaging in transactions with barred parties, solely by alleging that such a transaction took place?The case was decided on April 17, 2025.The Supreme Court held that To state a claim under Section 1106(a)(1)(C) of ERISA, a plaintiff need only plausibly allege the elements listed in that provision itself: that a plan fiduciary knowingly caused the plan to engage in a transaction involving goods, services, or facilities with a party in interest. The plaintiff is not required to plead that the transaction does not qualify for an exemption under Section 1108. Justice Sonia Sotomayor authored the unanimous opinion of the Court.Section 1106(a)(1)(C) establishes a clear, categorical prohibition on certain transactions between a pension plan and a party in interest. ERISA's structure places relevant exemptions, including those for reasonable and necessary services under Section 1108(b)(2)(A), in a separate statutory provision. Because those exemptions are laid out apart from the prohibitions and refer back to conduct already defined as unlawful, they function as affirmative defenses. As a result, plan fiduciaries who wish to invoke an exemption bear the burden of pleading and proving it. Plaintiffs, on the other hand, are not obliged to anticipate and refute every possible statutory or regulatory exemption.Reading exemptions as affirmative defenses also aligns with longstanding legal principles and avoids unworkable results. Requiring plaintiffs to negate all exemptions—especially when ERISA includes 21 statutory and hundreds of regulatory exemptions—would be impractical and unfair, particularly because the relevant facts are often in the defendant's possession. Procedural safeguards such as pleading requirements, discovery limits, and Rule 11 sanctions enable federal courts to deter and manage meritless litigation without shifting the pleading burden to plaintiffs. Consequently, only the elements in Section 1106(a)(1)(C) must be pleaded to survive a motion to dismiss.Justice Samuel Alito joined the majority opinion in full and authored a concurrence, in which Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh joined.The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

It's been a week filled with breaking news and, as usual, investigative journalists Mandy Matney and Liz Farrell are on it, starting with the arrest of Grant Solomon's mother. Grant was 18 years old when he was killed outside of Nashville under mysterious circumstances (and with his father, former news anchor Aaron Solomon, nearby). In the years since his death, Grant's mother has fought for law enforcement to take another look at her son's case and sought for protection for her daughter, who accused Aaron of sexual abuse.  This past Friday, Angie Solomon was arrested and charged with attempting to hire a hitman to kill Aaron. Mandy and Liz break down what happened and why the accusations seem … off.  Plus, reporter Beth Braden learns that two new witnesses to Grant's death came forward last spring and what they had to say is interesting.  Also on the show, Jane Doe No. 1 stands up to Myrtle Beach Pastor John-Paul Miller's legal bullying.  Plus a shocking (overlooked?) piece of evidence in the Scott Spivey case … no really, it's wild.  Premium members get updates on Russell Laffitte's plea deal, Alex Murdaugh's latest attempts to manipulate dummies and what's up with Cory Fleming's appeal?  Let's dive in...

The last several days in Donald Trump's courtroom saga have been nothing short of remarkable. Just last year, after a landmark trial in New York, Trump became the first former president to be found guilty on criminal charges. The Manhattan jury convicted him on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records—charges stemming from the so-called “hush money” case, allegations that Trump covered up payments meant to influence the 2016 election. In a surprise decision, Judge Juan Merchan sentenced Trump on January 10, 2025, to an unconditional discharge, meaning Trump avoided jail time and probation. This outcome left supporters relieved but critics calling for more accountability, and, unsurprisingly, Trump used the moment to rally his political base, declaring vindication while vowing to continue his agenda.Meanwhile, in the federal courts, the legal tides shifted dramatically following Trump's return to the White House. The two high-profile federal criminal cases—one in Florida regarding classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, and another in Washington D.C. related to accusations of obstruction and conspiracy to overturn the 2020 election—were both dismissed soon after his inauguration. In Florida, Judge Aileen Cannon ruled that Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment was improper, dismissing the indictment. The Justice Department eventually dropped its appeal, effectively ending prosecution in both the classified documents and obstruction matters. In D.C., Judge Tanya Chutkan granted a government motion to dismiss, closing the chapter on one of the most watched legal battles tied to January 6th.However, the courtrooms have not emptied. In the past month, drama erupted over President Trump's use of the Alien Enemies Act. The administration deported over 100 Venezuelan nationals, alleged gang members, to El Salvador, even as federal Judge James Boasberg ordered those planes turned back to the United States. Plaintiffs' lawyers argued Trump's team violated the judge's order, and Judge Boasberg himself accused the administration of “bad faith” for rushing removals before the courts could weigh in. Although the Supreme Court later allowed further deportations, citing jurisdictional issues, the episode inflamed debate about executive power and the rule of law.In parallel, President Trump has issued a flurry of executive orders, including directives to repeal regulations inconsistent with recent Supreme Court decisions, further polarizing the broader national conversation. Across the country, every courtroom appearance, filing, and headline ensures that the legal fights surrounding Donald Trump remain central to American life, driving both the news cycle and the ongoing political divide.

In this episode of The Effective Lawyer, Zinda Law Group CEO and founder Jack Zinda answers listener-submitted questions about building a law firm that runs on systems—not chaos.If you're constantly putting out fires, working long hours, and struggling to grow your firm, Jack offers practical strategies to bring clarity, structure, and intentional leadership to your practice. He walks through his weekly planning system, explains how to create an “ideal week,” and shares tools for better delegation and follow-up.Whether you're a solo attorney or managing a growing team, this episode offers real-world advice to help you take back control of your time and build a scalable firm.In This Episode:    How systems create efficiency, scalability, and work-life balance    Jack's weekly planning and review process    Building an “ideal week” for energy and productivity    Strategies for delegation and consistent follow-up    The value of weekly reflection for continuous improvementContact Jack Zinda:jack@zindalaw.com512-246-2224

Biracial, binational, queer human right activist Jason Jones began his lawsuit against Trinidad and Tobago's British colonial ban on same-gender sex in 2017. It was struck down in 2018, but an appeals court recently overturned that ruling and reinstated the law. Jones has one more chance to appeal that decision (interviewed by David Hunt). And in NewsWrap: transgender professional player Harriet Haynes sues the English Blackball Pool Federation to let her compete in the appropriate gender category, Redmond Sullivan is no longer a member of the Wagner College Iconic Fencing Club after a cisgender opponent refuses to play her, the Trump administration freezes Maine's federal education funding because of the state's trans-inclusive policies, queer-themed titles top the American Library Association's list of most banned books for the fourth consecutive year, the White House refuses to respond to journalists who use preferred pronouns, and more international LGBTQ+ news reported this week by Ret and David Hunt (produced by Brian DeShazor). All this on the April 14, 2025 edition of This Way Out! Join our family of listener-donors today at http://thiswayout.org/donate/

Send us a textAfter much anticipation since we started this podcast, Stuart Colburn joins us for a special episode focused on Texas! Stuart, a shareholder at Downs & Stanford, P.C., has over 25 years of experience in workers' compensation. He shares his journey into our industry and expertly navigates the evolution of the Texas Workers' Compensation system since the 1980s. Throughout the conversation, he highlights the unique aspects that make Texas' approach distinctly different from those of other states.Stuart is board certified in Workers' Compensation Law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization and was the founder and first Chair of the State Bar of Texas Workers' Compensation Section. He co-authors the Texas Workers' Compensation Handbook published by LexisNexis and, as a certified lobbyist and frequent Division of Workers' Compensation conference representative, brings valuable policy perspective to the conversation.(Correction: Stuart mentions 2011 as the year Wikipedia and iTunes emerged; however, the correct year is 2001.)NOTE: Stuart shares a slide deck during this episode, which you can see in the video version on our YouTube channel. Resources mentioned in this episode:Texas Workers' Compensation Handbook 2025 EditionTexas Department of Insurance - Workers' Compensation Texas Subsequent Injury FundAmerican Medical Association (AMA) GuidesOfficial Disability Guidelines ODG by MCG National Comp ConferenceStuart Colburn bio¡Muchas Gracias! Thank you for listening. We would appreciate you sharing our podcast with your friends on social media. Find Yvonne and Rafael on Linked In or follow us on Twitter @deconstructcomp

OA1149 - Even as most of the Biglaw establishment falls to Trump's whims, lawyers from smaller firms are stepping up to do the most necessary work  on the most important issues of our times. We're here to tell you a little more about some of them! But first: The House passes the “No Rogue Rulings Act” and we rip into some fascist nonsense from MAGA legal “thinker” Mike Davis defending the President's absolute  right to call anyone a terrorist and send them to hell without a hearing. Also: DHS's “evidence”(?) in support of Mahmoud Kahlil's deportation,  SCOTUS ‘s surprise mid-episode ruling ordering the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia from a Salvadoran gulag, and more on the truly inspirational lawyers who are aggressively pushing these fights forward. In today's footnote: can you sue ChatGPT for “hallucinating” terrible stories about you? One heavily-armed Georgia talk show host is gunning to find out. The “No Rogue Rulings Act”  (HR 1526)  Amicus brief filed in Korematsu Center et al in Perkins Coie v. DOJ (4/9/25) DHS “evidence” filed in Mahmoud Kahlil's deportation proceedings (4/10/25) U.S. Supreme Court's order in Noem v. Abrego Garcia (04/10/2025) Plaintiff's complaint in Walters v OpenAI   “SCOTUS must stop leftist judges' lawless sabotage of Trump agenda | Fox News, Mike Davis (3/31/25) Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law! This content is CAN credentialed, which means you can report instances of harassment, abuse, or other harm on their hotline at (617) 249-4255, or on their website at creatoraccountabilitynetwork.org.

This episode examines a lawsuit against Sean Combs, Emilio Estefan, and others by Manzaro Joseph, alleging human trafficking and severe abuse. #Diddy #seancombs #courtneyburgess #exposedpodcastfiles #podcast #exposed #seancombs #rap #cassie  Timestamps 02:49 Allegations and Key Defendants06:05 The Plaintiff's Experience09:56 The Freak-Off Event16:52 Charges against “Diddy”21:51 New Developments in the Case25:55 Dismissals and Legal ChallengesLegal Note: This Case has not been criminally decided and all persons discussed in this podcast are assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The criminal or civil charges expressed in this podcast are taken from public record and not the direct opinions of the host or producers of this podcast.   For collaborations, promotions, or appearances email Jim at:  https://www.exposedpodcastfiles@gmail.com  Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/exposed-scandalous-files-of-the-elite--6073723/support.

Searchlight New Mexico reporter Joshua Bowling sits down with Levi Monagle, an attorney who has represented survivors of Catholic sexual abuse. That includes about 140 cases exposed during the recent bankruptcy proceedings against the Archdiocese of Santa Fe. During that time, the church created a public list of 83 credibly accused priests — a list that Monagle says is woefully incomplete.Host: Lou DiVizioCorrespondent: Joshua BowlingGuest: Levi Monagle, Plaintiffs' Attorney For More Information: Undercount: why the Catholic church won't list many New Mexico priests who've been linked to sexual abuse – Searchlight New Mexico 

In this episode of The Effective Lawyer, Zinda Law Group CEO and founder, Jack Zinda, answers your listener questions. Discussed in this Episode:Self-managing law firmReferral pipelineClient referrals & reviews Saying no to bad casesManaging cash flowFinancial mistakesStaying motivatedBiggest regretSelf-Managing Law Firm: How do you create a self-managing law firm when you feel like you have to be involved in everything?Break down your tasks: What do you like doing vs. what you don't?Hand off the stuff you hate: Slowly delegate to employees, part-timers, or contractors.Start small: Hire an admin if you hate e-filing and paying bills.Figure out your worth: Put a dollar value on your time to see if you're doing tasks someone else should.Referral Pipeline: How do you get more referrals from other attorneys?Set goals: How many referrals do you want? Where do they currently come from?Go where the people are: Social media, email, speaking gigs, networking events.Have a plan: Measure your success before the actual referral.Networking is key: Go to events, introduce yourself, and get cards.Follow up: Email people you meet, invite them for lunch, and keep their info.Be consistent: Do this regularly to build a network.Client Referrals & Reviews: How do you get past clients to refer and leave positive reviews?Do good work: Seriously, be a good lawyer.Care about clients: It makes a huge difference.Get personal: Learn about their life and bring it up in conversations.First-name basis: Makes things feel friendly.Appointments only: Focus on their case without distractions.Sell your work: Tell them everything you've done on their case.Consistent contact: One-business-day rule for responses, 30-day updates.Remind them you exist: Social media, emails, cards.Ask for referrals: Don't be shy!Saying No to Bad Cases: How to avoid cases that drain resources?Set your standards: What's a "good" vs "bad" case for your firm?Value threshold: Have a minimum value for cases you take.Client behavior: Don't tolerate violent or abusive clients.Be upfront: Explain your process and investigation stage from the start.Refer out or reject: If a case isn't worth it, refer it to another firm or decline.Please don't blame the client: Frame it as the circumstances, not them.Managing Cash Flow: How do you handle cash flow when waiting for big settlements?Plan for delays: Build cash reserves (at least 2 months of expenses).Case volume: Have enough cases so you're not relying on one big one.Don't count your chickens: Don't spend money until it's in hand.Be aggressive in getting funds: Track and follow up on settlements.Financial Mistakes: What are the biggest money mistakes made by personal injury law firms?Shady marketing: Be careful of expensive companies that don't deliver.Expensive rent: Don't overspend on office space too soon.Hiring issues: Don't hire/fire too quickly, and don't underpay/overpay.No budget: Have a budget and understand your finances.Staying Motivated: How do you stay motivated with stressful cases/clients?Exercise: It helps clear your head!Take breaks: Get out of the office, do something fun.Take care of yourself: Don't absorb too much stress.Client management: Have strategies for demanding clients (homework, associates).Biggest Regret: What would Jack Zinda change about building his law firm?Focus on bigger cases sooner.Better vetting of hires (he had some crazy stories about bad hires!).You can reach Jack at:jack@zindalaw.com512-246-2224

Rene Thomas Folse, JD, Ph.D. is the host for this edition which reports on the following news stories: WCAB Outlines Ground Rules for WCJ Disqualification. Plaintiff's Attorney Disqualified for Violation of State Bar Rule 4.4. Activision Blizzard CEO Lawsuit Claims Defamatory Media Collusion. Appeal Reverses 33 out of 37 Counts Against Attorney Jon Woods. Sham Health Insurance Plan Resolves AG Claim for $1.3M. Minor Dent Leads to $3000 Insurance Fraud Sting Operation Arrest. Cal/OSHA Cites Contractor $157.5K for Open Trench Death. Annual Report: Santa Monica Workers' Comp Claims Surge.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, Jessica examines a pivotal voting rights case before the Supreme Court concerning Louisiana's congressional district lines. The case touches on the conflict between the Voting Rights Act and the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. Jessica reviews the legal arguments, reflects on past decisions like Shelby County, and explores the case's broader implications. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:Voting Rights Act and Supreme Court Case: Jessica Levinson delves into a Supreme Court case concerning the Voting Rights Act, highlighting a challenge over Louisiana's congressional districting. The essential question is whether the state violated the Act by diluting voting power or violated the Fourteenth Amendment by using race excessively in district creation.Louisiana District Lines Controversy: After the census, Louisiana's district lines came under scrutiny for having only one majority minority district, leading to lawsuits. The state later redrew the map to include two majority minority districts, sparking a new suit from non-African American voters claiming the excessive use of race in drawing these lines.Fourteenth Amendment and Equal Protection Clause: The tension between complying with the Voting Rights Act and the constraints of the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause is a major theme. The conversation touches on recent affirmative action cases, emphasizing the court's perspective that race should not be the predominant factor.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica

In the final episode of Zurich North America's "Future of Risk" podcast miniseries on social inflation, James Beal, Executive Director at Georgians for Lawsuit Reform, and Rebecca Fozo, Claims Judicial & Legislative Affairs, at Zurich North America, delve into premises liability. They discuss the legal responsibilities of property owners to ensure safety and explain how jury verdicts impact businesses and strain the economy. The conversation emphasizes the need for tort reform to provide stability and fair legal processes to combat fraudulent claims. In this miniseries, other episodes include:January 15: 2025 Legislative outlook: Reforming legal system abuseJanuary 29: Wide implications of third-party litigation fundingFebruary 12: Nuclear verdicts: The drivers, impacts and solutionsFebruary 26: Social Inflation: Missing The role of claims fraud March 12: Plaintiffs' tactics: Fueling legal system abuse

Zinda Law Group CEO and founder Jack Zinda teams up again with seasoned trial lawyer Max Massey to answer more of your top listener questions. This episode dives into key strategies for winning trials, building a successful law firm, and hiring the right legal talent. Whether you're a personal injury attorney, law firm owner, or aspiring trial lawyer, you'll find valuable, actionable insights in this episode.  Winning a Big Trial - The Little Things That Matter :  Deep case preparation strategies  Monthly case review best practices  Identifying and preparing key witnesses  Effectively presenting non-economic damages Credibility of Non-Economic Witnesses:  Build layered witness credibility  Vet and prepare non-economic witnesses  Anticipate challenges during cross-examination  Hiring the Right Law Student or New Attorney :  Communication and client connection skills  Grit, competitiveness, and problem-solving ability  Research and legal reasoning for new attorneys Identifying Candidates with the “It” Factor :  How to recognize persistence and initiative  What to look for in cover letters and resumes  The importance of a strong work ethic  Scaling a Law Firm: From Solo to Success :  Building a financial and cash flow plan  Smart, strategic hiring decisions  Tracking key law firm metrics for growth  Work-Life Balance for Law Firm Leaders :  Time management and delegation strategies  Protecting your calendar with key meetings  Avoiding diminishing returns through work-life balance  Starting Your Own Law Firm: The “Why” and the How: Defining your motivation and vision  Building a solid financial and operational plan  Marketing and client acquisition strategies  

Jim Pattillo, Partner, Christian & Small joins Bill Kanasky, Jr., Ph.D. to talk about different types of plaintiff attorneys. Jim and Bill discuss what the reasons are for why there has been a degradation in civility between attorneys in recent years and what can be done about it. They share how important curating a reputation is for younger attorneys and the importance of communication. Bill and Jim identify several different plaintiff attorney types and how to manage them:  - The unqualified and incompetent plaintiff attorney - The jerk, bombastic plaintiff attorney - The too busy or lazy plaintiff attorney - The unethical plaintiff attorney - The unrealistic plaintiff attorney  Lastly, Jim shares his firm's philosophy on mentoring and training younger attorneys and his advice to early career attorneys on honing their craft. Watch the video of this episode: https://www.courtroomsciences.com/r/6Em

In this second episode featuring lawyers turned political candidates, we speak to the asbestos, dust and occupational cancers lawyer looking to return the Queensland-based seat of Capricornia into Labor's hands. In this episode of The Lawyers Weekly Show, host Jerome Doraisamy speaks with Maurice Blackburn lawyer Emily Mawson about growing up in a coal mining family, how unionism and justice were ingrained in her at an early age, the importance of standing up for workers, developments in protecting workers from illnesses, and how she – as a young lawyer – came to stand as a candidate for Labor. Mawson also delves into the headline issues facing voters in Queensland, why she feels being a plaintiff lawyer makes her well placed to listen to and address those concerns, the need for more younger candidates in elections, how she's found the transition from legal practice to being a candidate, and why it is so important for young lawyers to roll up their sleeves and better service the community. If you like this episode, show your support by  rating us or leaving a review on Apple Podcasts (The Lawyers Weekly Show) and by following Lawyers Weekly on social media: Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. If you have any questions about what you heard today, any topics of interest you have in mind, or if you'd like to lend your voice to the show, email editor@lawyersweekly.com.au for more insights!

“Plaintiff would pay for her statement regarding Tupac.” In this chilling line from an assault case filed against Sean Diddy Combs, legal representatives for Ashley Parham, an alleged victim's of Sean Combs synopsize what is a shocking and brutal claim of sexual assault by Combs. Parham's story is deeply disturbing. It also provides telling insight into Comb's alleged network of trafficking and coercion…and seems to point to figures still hiding in the darkness. Follow Pop Mystery Pod on Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok @popmysterypod Pop Mystery Pod is written and produced by Tess Barker @tesstifybarker. Produced by Tyler Hill.Theme song by Rick Wood @Rickw00d.Support independent pop journalism and join us on Patreon at Pop Mystery Pod. Get access to ad free episodes, bonus content, and polls about upcoming topics. patreon.com/PopMysteryPodFollow Tess's other podcasts Lady to Lady and Toxic wherever you get your pods. Make sure to leave us a review! And tell a friend about the show! See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Governor Brian Kemp got what he (and his 'dark money' donors) sought: legislation to try and limit lawsuits and suppress massive jury verdicts (rare as they actually are, actually) . On today to discuss the kinds of impact this bill will have on everyday Georgians and particularly plaintiffs seeking damages, my good friend Nick Utley with Utley Law Firm took my call. ------Columnist Jay Bookman likened the Trump Administration's stripping away of federal agencies' workforce to a "giant game of Jenga," and honestly, it's the most appropriate framing I've read of this push to gut the U.S. government. ------Cautiously excited about the Georgia Department of Transportation is at the 'seeking input' stage of exploring an Atlanta-to-Savannah rail option. Before anyone gets too excited, though, this is like "step two" in a long list of steps before a shovel moves a patch of dirt, but still ...

Plaintiff John Doe, represented by Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, files this complaint against Defendant Sean Combs. The allegations are based on personal knowledge and information. Plaintiff asserts claims against Combs, detailing specific grievances and legal grounds for action. The complaint outlines the nature of the alleged wrongdoing, including factual and legal bases for holding Combs accountable.This lawsuit seeks relief for the harm allegedly caused by Combs, requesting appropriate legal remedies. The complaint establishes jurisdiction, presents supporting evidence, and sets forth claims that Plaintiff intends to prove in court. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks justice and compensation for the alleged misconduct by Defendant.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.637615.1.0.pdf

Our roundup episodes summarize brand-new, deposition-related court rulings from around the country. We cover four new rulings in this episode on crucial issues:You can successfully oppose even otherwise taxable deposition costs, when an adversary prevails, by making these fairness-based argumentsFRCP 30(b)(6) topic lists must be proportionate to the case, as a court ruled when refusing to evaluate a list of 503 topicsThe rule of sequestration does not apply in federal civil cases and the majority of states, but you may succeed in getting a court to impose it if you can show one of these "plus" factorsIn-person depositions are still a thing, and should not be treated as unusual or requiring an extraordinary showingAs always, thanks for listening! And remember - these episodes are always free and contain no advertising. What's the catch? Only that we'd ask you to leave us a 5-star rating wherever you download your podcasts. Those ratings are deeply motivating to, and deeply appreciated by, our research and production staff. And be sure to check out the book on which this podcast is based - 10,000 Depositions Later: The Premier Litigation Guide for Superior Deposition Practice. Now in its 4th edition at 625 pages, available on Amazon and almost everywhere books are sold.SHOW NOTESLUV N' CARE v. LINDSEY LAURAIN, ET AL, No. CV 3:16-00777, 2025 WL 622334, at *8 (W.D. La. Feb. 26, 2025) (while courts cannot award costs not explicitly identified in 28 U.S.C. § 1920, courts do have discretion to deny award of otherwise recoverable costs where fairness or other considerations dictate)NATHEN W. BARTON, Plaintiff, v. REAL INNOVATION INC. et al., Defendant., No. 3:24-CV-05194-DGE, 2025 WL 606167, at *1 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 25, 2025) See 36-page notice (Case 3:24-cv-05194-DGE Document 51-1 Filed 01/14/25 Page 1 of 36 (contains 503 actual questions, not topics)MARK WRIGHT-AHERN, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF CLERMONT, Defendant., No. 5:24-CV-173-MMH-PRL, 2025 WL 605059, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 25, 2025) (rule of sequestration does not apply to depositions, absent particularized showing of specific facts warranting the relief; the correct procedure for seeking to exclude a person from deposition is to seek a protective order); see also Order (from same case, awarding fees and explaining sequestration concept in depositions), CM/ECF Document No. 31, filed Jan. 31, 2025)UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. The M/Y Amadea, a Motor Yacht Bearing Int'l Mar. Org. No. 1012531, Defendant., No. 23 CIV. 9304 (DEH), 2025 WL 754124, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 10, 2025) (ordering witness to travel overseas to United States for in-person deposition, finding that while remote depositions are the new normal, there remains nothing unusual about insisting that a key witness appear in person)

Plaintiff John Doe, represented by Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, files this complaint against Defendant Sean Combs. The allegations are based on personal knowledge and information. Plaintiff asserts claims against Combs, detailing specific grievances and legal grounds for action. The complaint outlines the nature of the alleged wrongdoing, including factual and legal bases for holding Combs accountable.This lawsuit seeks relief for the harm allegedly caused by Combs, requesting appropriate legal remedies. The complaint establishes jurisdiction, presents supporting evidence, and sets forth claims that Plaintiff intends to prove in court. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks justice and compensation for the alleged misconduct by Defendant.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.637615.1.0.pdf

Plaintiff John Doe, represented by Eisenberg & Baum, LLP, files this complaint against Defendant Sean Combs. The allegations are based on personal knowledge and information. Plaintiff asserts claims against Combs, detailing specific grievances and legal grounds for action. The complaint outlines the nature of the alleged wrongdoing, including factual and legal bases for holding Combs accountable.This lawsuit seeks relief for the harm allegedly caused by Combs, requesting appropriate legal remedies. The complaint establishes jurisdiction, presents supporting evidence, and sets forth claims that Plaintiff intends to prove in court. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks justice and compensation for the alleged misconduct by Defendant.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.637615.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The legal battle over the Franklin Park renovation project of White Stadium goes to trial this week. Plaintiffs in the case argue that the $200 million project is illegal privatization of public trust land. The City of Boston and Boston Unity Soccer Partners (the defendants) have denied the privatization claims, saying the renovated stadium will be accessible to Boston Public School students. Dan discussed the lawsuit and what's at stake with Gayla Cawley, Renee Stacy Welch, she is a plaintiff, a Franklin Park Defender, a community advocate and a park abuttes, and Dot Fennel, a community advocate. Listen to WBZ NewsRadio on the NEW iHeart Radio app and be sure to set WBZ NewsRadio as your #1 preset!

A new constitutional crisis has broken out with the Trump Administration refusing to comply, again, with a Federal judge's orders. In a new filing, The Trump Administration just confessed to violating a Court Order to stop Trump's unconstitutional exercise of war powers to deport hundreds of people to El Salvador and Honduras in violation of a DC Chief Judge's order blocking that action, and the ACLU representing Plaintiffs have filed this morning their Notice to the Court outlining that the ways in which Trump has violated the Court's order, and demanding that the Court intervene and take action. Michael Popok breaks down what has happened in the last 48 hours, and what will happen next in court. To get our $297 when you buy a PAIR offer, including a free charger, head to https://ShopMDHearing.com and use code LEGALAF. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Plaintiff Latroya Grayson, represented by her legal counsel, is respectfully requesting an extension of time to comply with the Court's January 6, 2025 Order in the case Grayson v. Combs, et al. (Case No. 1:24-cv-09857-JAV). The request specifically seeks additional time to amend the Plaintiff's complaint, citing the need for an extension through and including February 21, 2025.This request is made with due regard for the Court's timeline and procedural requirements, ensuring that Plaintiff has adequate opportunity to address the directives outlined in the Court's order. The Plaintiff's counsel seeks the Court's understanding and approval for the extension to ensure proper and thorough compliance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.633985.7.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

During Ep. 22 of the Ask the Law Firm Seller Show, Jeremy E. Poock, Esq. addresses the following question: What value do Senior Attorney-led Personal Injury Law Firms offer to Growing Personal Injury Law Firms? In response, Poock explains the following dual value that Senior Attorney-led Personal Injury Law Firms offer to Growing Personal Injury Law Firms:   Value No. 1 – Originate New Clients: In contrast to the rising costs for today's Growing PI firms to generate new clients (egs. Google, optimized websites, vanity phone numbers, social media, ads on TV, radio, and via billboards, and lead generation cos.), Senior Attorney-led PI firms present the following lower costs for originating new clients: (a) Established Books of Business filled with clients and referral sources; (b) Rainmaker attorneys well known in their communities who continue generating new matters via their word-of-mouth reputations among individuals and professionals; (c) Legacy phone numbers; (d) Mature websites; and (e) Untapped digital value in terms of (1) Access to 100s (even 1000s) of 5-Star Google Reviews; and (2) Opportunities to convert decades worth of subject matter knowledge to digital content to post via Multi-Channel Digital Marketing to attract the attention of potential clients.   As Poock states, “[I]t's very expensive for growing PI firms today to acquire new clients because the only way to acquire those new clients is by investing in Google, optimizing your website, vanity, phone numbers, social media, TV, radio, billboards and lead gen companies.   A far less expensive way to be generating new clients today is by purchasing, acquiring, merging with Senior Attorney-led firms that offer legacy value in terms of Books of Business, rainmaking skills, legacy phone numbers, websites that are mature, and untapped, digital value in the form of Google reviews, and converting subject matter knowledge into digital content.”   Value No. 2 – Maximize Case Value: Once Growing Personal Injury Law Firms originate new clients, the following question arises: How do we maximize case value?   “[A]nd, that's where Senior Attorneys at Senior Attorney-led [PI] firms offer tremendous value to those growing PI firms,” Poock states.   Examples of how Senior Attorney PI attorneys maximize case value include: (a) Assisting with signing-up high value cases based upon experience, coupled with the ability to assure clients that they are in “good hands” with a law firm that has been there/done that, including experience with achieving high value results in matters just like theirs; (b) Decades of experience of knowing how to “build the case;” (c) The value of including a Senior Attorney PI's signature to a demand letter or complaint, where insurance companies and defense counsel immediately know the trial and settlement history of the attorney representing the Plaintiff's interest; (d) A career's worth of experience with Discovery and conducting depositions; and (e) Trial ready, including often maintaining reputations among defense counsel, mediators, and judges.   As Poock summarizes, for those Growing PI law firms who continue spending vast sums to generate new clients, Senior Attorney-led firms present tremendous opportunities to maximize case values because of their experience, know-how, and reputations.

The WWAGOP lawsuit disputing State Senate General Election finally heard in courtAGOP lawsuit challenging Clark County' 4202islative District 81lection results has been heard in court.Plaintiffs claim voter roll issues may have impacted the race outcome,while the judge ruled much of their evidence inadmissible.Read the full story at https//:.larkcountytoday.om/ews/agop-awsuit-isputing-tate-enate-eneral-lection-inally-eard-n-ourt/www.larkCountyToday.om #ashingtonState #larkCounty #lectionLawsuit #oterRolls #lectionIntegrity #regKimsey #AGOP #oteRecount #allotCounting #egislativeDistrict8#1politics #ocalNews #larkCountyWa

This Day in Legal History: Warsaw Pact States Join NATOOn March 12, 1999, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland became the first former Warsaw Pact countries to join the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). This historic moment marked a significant shift in the post-Cold War security landscape, as these nations formally aligned with the Western military alliance nearly a decade after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Their accession symbolized a decisive break from their communist past and reinforced their commitment to democratic governance, rule of law, and collective defense.The expansion was not without controversy. Russia viewed NATO's eastward growth as a threat to its sphere of influence, deepening tensions that would continue into the 21st century. However, for the newly admitted countries, NATO membership provided critical security assurances against potential aggression, particularly given their historical experiences with Soviet domination. The accession process required extensive military and political reforms, ensuring that these nations met NATO's standards for democracy, civilian control of the military, and defense readiness.The inclusion of the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland set the stage for further NATO enlargement, with additional Eastern European countries joining in subsequent years. It also reinforced NATO's role as a stabilizing force in Europe during a period of geopolitical uncertainty. The decision underscored the alliance's post-Cold War mission of promoting security and democracy beyond its original Western European membership. Today, this expansion remains a key milestone in the ongoing debate over NATO's role in global security and its relationship with Russia.The removal of Special Counsel Hampton Dellinger has raised concerns about the politicization of the Office of Special Counsel (OSC), an independent agency that protects federal whistleblowers. Dellinger, who was dismissed by President Trump without explanation, initially challenged his firing but later withdrew his case after a federal appellate court sided with the administration. His removal highlights the administration's broader efforts to exert control over independent agencies, a move that legal experts warn could undermine their impartiality.During his tenure, Dellinger was an advocate for federal workers, helping reinstate over 5,000 Department of Agriculture employees who were improperly fired. His dismissal is expected to weaken the OSC's role in protecting workers from political retaliation. Legal scholars suggest that unless the Supreme Court intervenes, the precedent set by his firing could give future presidents greater authority over independent agencies.The case also ties into a broader legal battle over presidential power, as courts are reviewing Trump's terminations of other agency officials, including members of the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. While Dellinger had legal grounds to challenge his firing, he strategically chose not to pursue the case, allowing stronger challenges—such as that of NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox—to take precedence.The legal debate is moving toward a potential Supreme Court review of Humphrey's Executor v. United States, a 1935 decision that limits the president's power to remove independent agency officials. If overturned, the ruling could significantly expand presidential authority over such agencies.Dellinger Exit Deepens OSC Politicization as Workers Lose AllyA U.S. judge will hold a hearing on Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil's challenge to his arrest by immigration authorities, a case that has sparked protests and political debate. Khalil, a Palestinian student and U.S. permanent resident, was arrested outside his university residence by Homeland Security agents. The Trump administration has accused him—without providing any evidence—of supporting Hamas, though Khalil has not been charged with any crime.Judge Jesse Furman has temporarily blocked Khalil's deportation and may order his release if his rights were violated. However, an immigration court—not Furman—would ultimately decide whether Khalil can be deported, a process that could take years. Khalil's lawyers argue that his arrest is political retaliation for his pro-Palestinian activism and violates his First Amendment rights. His detention in Louisiana has limited his legal access, and his wife, who is eight months pregnant, has spoken out against his treatment.The case raises broader legal questions about the intersection of free speech and immigration law, particularly as Trump has vowed to deport foreign students involved in pro-Palestinian protests. Khalil's arrest has triggered demonstrations and condemnation from Democratic lawmakers, who view it as political repression.Judge to hold hearing over Columbia student protester's challenge to arrest | ReutersA major real estate brokerage, Howard Hanna Real Estate Services, has asked a U.S. judge in Missouri to recuse himself from an antitrust lawsuit due to political donations made to his wife's campaign by the plaintiffs' lawyers. The lawsuit accuses brokerages of conspiring to inflate real estate commissions, and plaintiffs have already won significant settlements in related cases.Howard Hanna argues that the donations create an appearance of impropriety, requiring Judge Stephen Bough's recusal under ethics rules. Bough had previously disclosed the donations and offered to step down in an earlier case, but no party requested his removal at the time. Plaintiffs' lawyer Michael Ketchmark dismissed the recusal request as meritless and a delay tactic after Howard Hanna had lost key motions.Bough's courtroom previously hosted a landmark jury verdict in a related antitrust case, leading to over a billion dollars in settlements with brokerages and the National Association of Realtors. The judge's decision on whether to step aside could impact the trajectory of ongoing real estate antitrust litigation.US judge in brokerage antitrust case faces recusal bid over political donations | ReutersNew Jersey is poised to increase its angel investor tax credit (AITC) from 20% to 35% of investment costs, with a $35 million annual cap. Given the limited funds, ensuring the credit is effectively allocated is essential. However, the proposed bill includes “carbon footprint reduction technology” as an eligible category, which could allow carbon capture projects to qualify. Critics argue that carbon capture is neither emerging nor effective—it is costly, inefficient, and largely benefits fossil fuel companies by prolonging their operations rather than reducing emissions.Instead of funding speculative or ineffective technologies, the state should prioritize investments in proven decarbonization strategies like renewable energy, battery storage, and energy efficiency improvements. These sectors have demonstrated cost savings, emissions reductions, and job creation without the need for indefinite subsidies. Tightening the AITC eligibility criteria would prevent resources from being diverted to projects with questionable climate benefits.By refining its definition of eligible technologies, New Jersey can maximize the impact of its tax credit, ensuring funds support tangible climate and economic progress. States that design smart, targeted incentives will attract startups and clean energy investments, while those that fund vague or ineffective projects risk falling behind. As federal climate incentives remain uncertain, state policies will play a crucial role in shaping the future of clean energy investment.New Jersey Should Tighten Its Angel Investor Credit Eligibility This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Zurich North America's, “Future of Risk” podcast, delivers another eye-opening episode of the social inflation podcast mini-series, underscoring the need for a unified response to the escalating challenges posed by plaintiffs' tactics and the significant impact it is having on businesses and consumers alike. Zurich North America's, Lisa Bellino, VP, Claims Judicial & Legislative Affairs and Allen Kirsh, SVP, Head of Claims Judicial &Legislative Affairs, discuss what factors are driving the rise in insurance claims and litigation costs. Listen as the guests tackle challenges that are playing a role in maximizing jury awards, offering optimism for positive change through continued advocacy and legislative efforts.

In this episode of The Effective Lawyer, Jack Zinda dives into three key topics that impact law firm growth, efficiency, and leadership. Host Jack Zinda answers listener questions on the best books for personal and professional development, the role of AI in modern law practice, and what "superpower" sets successful law firms apart. Packed with insights from years of experience, this episode offers practical takeaways for lawyers looking to scale their firms and sharpen their skills.  Discussed in This Episode: Essential Books & Learning Resources for Lawyers The E-Myth by Michael Gerber – A foundational book for understanding law firm management and scaling. The Effective Executive by Peter Drucker – Key insights on productivity and decision-making. The 4-Hour Workweek by Tim Ferriss – Practical strategies on delegation and efficiency. Getting Things Done by David Allen – A framework for reducing stress and improving task management. David Ball on Damages – Trial strategy essentials. Ongoing CLEs and jurisdiction-specific training to stay ahead in legal practice. The importance of always reading a business book, an advocacy book, and a tactical resource to continuously improve. AI & Legal Tech: Streamlining Law Firm Operations The evolving role of AI in intake, case management, and marketing. Experimenting with AI-driven case summarization for improved efficiency. Using AI for content generation, legal research, and internal workflow automation. Best practices for AI integration, including compliance with ethical and data privacy regulations. Encouraging team-wide AI adoption to boost productivity and leverage emerging technologies. What Is a Law Firm's Superpower? The defining trait is empathy – The ability to deeply understand clients, opponents, and decision-makers. Understanding the real-life impact of injuries on clients beyond just legal damages. Empathizing with insurance adjusters and defense attorneys to negotiate more effectively. Recognizing what motivates judges and tailoring trial strategies accordingly. The power of emotional intelligence in case strategy, client relations, and firm culture.  Connect with Us: Have a question for Jack? jack@zindalaw.com 512-246-2224 

Standing is the legal ability to file a lawsuit.Only those directly involved and affected by an issue have standing.Article III of the Constitution gives federal courts the right to preside over "cases" and "controversies."A three-part test must be met for standing: Injury in Fact, Causation (Traceability), and Redressability.Injury in Fact: The plaintiff must have a concrete and particularized injury.Causation: There must be a direct link between the defendant's conduct and the plaintiff's injury.Redressability: The court must be able to remedy the plaintiff's injury.Individual Standing: Lawsuits for personal harms suffered.Third-Party Standing: Suing on behalf of someone else under specific conditions.Organizational Standing: Organizations suing on behalf of their members.Taxpayer Standing: Limited exceptions for challenging government spending.Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife (1992): Mere ideological interest is insufficient for standing.Massachusetts v. EPA (2007): States can sue with specific harms caused by federal inaction.Hollingsworth v. Perry (2013): General interest in enforcing a law is insufficient for standing.Challenges to standing include arguing no real injury, no direct causation, or the case is moot.Ensure a direct, personal injury when considering a lawsuit.Show a clear link between the defendant's actions and the harm.Courts do not hear cases based purely on moral or political beliefs.Check if an organization can file on your behalf if affected.Standing ensures courts hear cases where plaintiffs are directly involved and affected by the outcome.Plaintiffs must demonstrate injury, causation, and redressability.Understanding standing is crucial for legal action and following high-profile cases.

This Day in Legal History: Dred Scott DecidedOn March 6, 1857, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its infamous ruling in Dred Scott v. Sandford, a decision that deepened national tensions over slavery. The Court held that Dred Scott, an enslaved man who had lived in free territories, was not a U.S. citizen and therefore had no legal standing to sue for his freedom. In a sweeping opinion by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the Court went further, declaring that Congress had no power to prohibit slavery in federal territories. This effectively struck down the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had restricted the spread of slavery in certain parts of the country. The ruling was celebrated in the South but outraged abolitionists and many in the North, who saw it as an alarming expansion of pro-slavery power.The Dred Scott decision is widely regarded as one of the worst in Supreme Court history, as it denied citizenship and legal protections to Black Americans. It also emboldened pro-slavery forces while further alienating the growing anti-slavery movement. The backlash contributed to the intensifying sectional divide that would lead to the Civil War just four years later. During the war, President Abraham Lincoln and Congress took steps to undermine the decision, culminating in the passage of the 13th and 14th Amendments. These amendments abolished slavery and established birthright citizenship, directly overturning Dred Scott. Today, the case stands as a stark reminder of how the law has been used to uphold racial injustice—and how later legal reforms can correct such profound wrongs.The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against President Donald Trump's effort to withhold payments from foreign aid organizations for work already completed. The decision upheld an order by U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, requiring the government to release nearly $2 billion in funds owed to contractors and grant recipients under USAID and the State Department. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined the Court's liberal justices to form the majority, while four conservative justices dissented. The Trump administration had paused all foreign aid on January 20, citing an “America First” agenda, which disrupted humanitarian efforts worldwide. Aid organizations sued, arguing Trump exceeded his authority by defunding programs approved by Congress. The administration contended that enforcing payments without proper review amounted to judicial overreach. Despite Ali's repeated orders, the administration largely kept the funds frozen, prompting legal battles over compliance. Plaintiffs warned that continued delays would cause “extraordinary and irreversible harm” to millions relying on aid. The Supreme Court did not provide a rationale for its order but instructed Ali to clarify compliance obligations. A hearing is scheduled for March 7 to determine the next steps.US Supreme Court won't let Trump withhold payment to foreign aid groups | ReutersDozens of U.S. hospital systems and healthcare providers have filed lawsuits against Blue Cross Blue Shield, alleging the insurer underpaid them by billions. These providers chose to opt out of a $2.8 billion class-action settlement in Alabama, which is awaiting final approval. The new lawsuits, filed in federal courts in California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, argue that Blue Cross and its affiliates conspired to divide the market, reducing competition and driving down reimbursement rates in violation of antitrust laws. Plaintiffs, including Bon Secours Mercy Health and Temple University Health, believe they could recover more through individual lawsuits than the settlement. Blue Cross has denied wrongdoing and declined to comment. The final approval hearing for the Alabama settlement is scheduled for July 29. This litigation follows a separate $2.7 billion antitrust settlement in 2020 for commercial and individual subscribers, which the U.S. Supreme Court upheld last year. Some large companies also opted out of that settlement to pursue their own claims.Hospitals line up to sue Blue Cross, opting out of $2.8 bln settlement | ReutersThe U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on whether the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the authority to license temporary nuclear waste storage sites, a case brought by Texas and oil industry interests. The dispute centers on a facility in western Texas, licensed by the NRC in 2021, which opponents argue poses environmental and security risks. Some conservative justices questioned whether "temporary" storage could last indefinitely, undermining efforts to establish a permanent waste site. Liberal justices focused on whether the plaintiffs had legal standing, as they did not initially challenge the NRC's decision through the agency's process. The case follows past failures to establish a permanent nuclear waste site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, despite significant federal investment. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals previously ruled the NRC lacked authority under the Atomic Energy Act, prompting the Biden administration to appeal—a move continued under Trump. A decision is expected by June.US Supreme Court hears Texas nuclear waste storage dispute | Reuters This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

Hear that gurgling sound? That's the sound of the Trump DOJ, outmanned, outgunned, and underfunded courtesy of Elon Musk, losing regularly under the strain of 95 cases in the first 35 days of the Administration. Michael Popok reports on the DOJ telling an unsympathetic federal judge that they just couldn't get to his case because they don't have enough staff and what that means for Plaintiff's groups suing the Trump Administration at a record pace. Upgrade your sleep with Miracle Made! Go to https://TryMiracle.com/LEGALAF and use the code LEGALAF to claim your FREE 3 PIECE TOWEL SET and SAVE over 40% OFF. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This Day in Legal History: Abraham Lincoln Inaugurated On March 4, 1861, Abraham Lincoln was inaugurated as the 16th president of the United States, taking office at a time of immense national turmoil. Seven Southern states had already seceded from the Union, and the country teetered on the brink of civil war. In his inaugural address, Lincoln struck a careful balance between firmness and conciliation, stating that while he had no intention to interfere with slavery where it existed, he would also not allow the Union to be dissolved. He appealed to the South's “better angels” and warned that secession was unlawful, emphasizing that the Constitution was designed to create “a more perfect Union.” This speech set the tone for a presidency marked by Lincoln's deep empathy for the downtrodden and his capacity for personal growth.  Often celebrated for his moral clarity, Lincoln was also a leader willing to change his mind when confronted with new information. As the Civil War progressed, his views on slavery evolved, culminating in the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863. He once said, “I shall adopt new views as fast as they shall appear to be true views,” an acknowledgment of his willingness to adapt when justice demanded it. This intellectual humility was one of his greatest strengths, allowing him to navigate the unprecedented crisis before him. His presidency, which began on this day, would redefine the nation's understanding of freedom, democracy, and leadership.Lincoln's presidency saw the transformation of a man as much as a nation. When he first took office, he publicly questioned the intellectual equality of Black people and initially supported only limited measures to restrict slavery's expansion. However, as the war unfolded and he engaged with Black leaders like Frederick Douglass, Lincoln's views evolved dramatically. By the end of the conflict, he not only issued the Emancipation Proclamation but also argued for Black suffrage, stating in his final speech that he believed Black men deserved the right to vote. He also expressed openness to women's suffrage, a radical position for the time. That April 11, 1865, speech, in which he publicly called for Black enfranchisement, enraged John Wilkes Booth, who declared, “That is the last speech he will ever make!” Three days later, Booth made good on his threat, assassinating Lincoln at Ford's Theatre. Lincoln's first inauguration marked the beginning of a journey that would not only reshape his own beliefs but also alter the course of American history—at the cost of his life and those of 400,000 of his fellow Americans.Immigrant rights groups have filed a lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's decision to end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for Haitian and Venezuelan migrants. The lawsuit, brought in Boston federal court, opposes Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's move to accelerate the expiration of deportation protections and work permits for 521,000 Haitians by August. This reverses the Biden administration's previous extension of TPS for Haiti through February 2026. A similar decision was made for Venezuelan TPS recipients, with protections ending as early as April 2 for 348,000 individuals, a move already facing separate legal challenges. The lawsuit, filed by advocacy groups and individual migrants, argues that DHS lacked the authority to revoke an existing TPS extension and acted based on racial bias and political motivations. It cites past disparaging remarks by Trump about Haitian and Venezuelan immigrants as evidence of discrimination, alleging violations of the Fifth Amendment's equal protection guarantees. The Department of Homeland Security has not yet responded.By way of brief background, the lawsuit claims the administration's actions violate the Fifth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. While the Fourteenth Amendment explicitly provides equal protection against state discrimination, the Fifth Amendment has been interpreted to extend similar protections against federal government actions. Plaintiffs argue that the abrupt termination of TPS disproportionately harms Haitian and Venezuelan migrants and is driven by racial and ethnic bias rather than lawful considerations.Lawsuit challenges Trump's end to Haitian, Venezuelan deportation protections | ReutersKraken announced that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has agreed in principle to dismiss its lawsuit accusing the cryptocurrency exchange of operating as an unregistered securities exchange. The dismissal, which comes with no admission of wrongdoing, penalties, or required business changes, is with prejudice, preventing the SEC from refiling the case. Kraken criticized the lawsuit as a politically motivated effort by the Biden administration that hindered innovation. The SEC, which had sued Kraken in 2023 under former Chair Gary Gensler's leadership, has shifted its approach to crypto regulation since Trump's return to office. Recently, the agency also dropped a similar case against Coinbase and is considering settling a civil fraud case against Justin Sun. The lawsuit had accused Kraken of facilitating crypto trades without proper regulatory compliance, but the company maintained that crypto assets do not fall under traditional securities laws.In legal terms, a dismissal with prejudice means the case is permanently closed and cannot be refiled. This is significant for Kraken because it ensures the SEC cannot bring the same claims against the company in the future. This type of dismissal often indicates that the plaintiff (in this case, the SEC) has decided not to pursue the matter further due to legal weaknesses or shifting priorities.Kraken says SEC to dismiss lawsuit | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg Tax this week focuses on the Multistate Tax Commission's (MTC) proposed rule aimed at simplifying tax compliance for mobile workers. While the proposal is a step in the right direction—creating a safe harbor for those working in nonresident states for 20 days or fewer—it doesn't go far enough to address the real burdens faced by workers and businesses.To make the rule truly effective, I argue that three key modifications are needed: increasing the safe harbor threshold to 30 days, implementing an income-based sliding scale, and eliminating arbitrary carve-outs for certain high-income professionals.Currently, 41 states impose income tax on nonresidents, with some—like Arkansas and Delaware—triggering tax obligations after just one day of work. This creates a compliance nightmare for mobile workers, who may have to file multiple state tax returns for short business trips. The MTC's 20-day threshold is an improvement, but expanding it to 30 days would better align with existing state policies and recommendations from tax advocacy groups.Additionally, the MTC's one-size-fits-all approach fails to differentiate between income levels. A sales rep earning $50,000 a year and a hedge fund manager making $5 million shouldn't be treated the same. A sliding scale—offering a longer grace period for lower-income earners while maintaining stricter thresholds for high-income, highly mobile workers—would make compliance fairer and more practical. Pegging the income thresholds to inflation would further ensure middle-class workers aren't disproportionately impacted over time.Finally, the proposal's exclusion of professional athletes, entertainers, and undefined “persons of prominence” is problematic. These individuals are denied the safe harbor, while a high-earning executive or consultant would benefit from it. The distinction isn't based on income but on profession, creating an arbitrary and inconsistent standard. If fairness and clarity are the goals, the MTC should remove these exceptions.With states actively debating mobile workforce tax reforms and Congress failing to pass a federal solution for nearly two decades, now is the time to get this right. Expanding the threshold, implementing an income-based scale, and removing unfair carve-outs would make the rule more equitable and increase the likelihood of state adoption. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

After building his career as an engineer at Facebook and as a venture capitalist at Lightspeed Venture Partners, Jay Madheswaran and his cofounders spotted an opportunity to deploy cutting-edge AI to transform what they saw as an underserved segment of the legal market, launching Eve, an AI platform purpose-built for plaintiffs' law firms. Eve has quickly gained traction, recently securing a $47 million Series A round led by Andreessen Horowitz, and boasting 800% year-over-year growth.  But what makes Eve's story particularly interesting is its mission to transform traditional plaintiffs' firms into what Madheswaran calls "AI-native law firms" – where technology does not just automate tasks but fundamentally changes how legal services are delivered, in part by encoding firms' unique knowledge and processes into intelligent systems. In today's episode, Madheswaran joins host Bob Ambrogi to explain his concept of AI-native law firms and describe how Eve's technology can help firms double or triple their caseloads by automating everything from case-intake analysis to document drafting, all while learning to work in each firm's unique voice and style.  He also discusses the challenges of building trust with lawyers around AI and his vision for increasingly specialized legal services in an AI-powered future.   Thank You To Our Sponsors This episode of LawNext is generously made possible by our sponsors. We appreciate their support and hope you will check them out.   Paradigm, home to the practice management platforms PracticePanther, Bill4Time, MerusCase and LollyLaw; the e-payments platform Headnote; and the legal accounting software TrustBooks. Briefpoint, eliminating routine discovery response and request drafting tasks so you can focus on drafting what matters (or just make it home for dinner). LEX Reception, Never miss a call, with expert answering service for Lawyers. Legalweek, March 24-27, New York Hilton Midtown. Register today at legalweekshow.com.    If you enjoy listening to LawNext, please leave us a review wherever you listen to podcasts.  

In this episode of “The Diddy Saga” Jim Chapman brings you inside (5) of the most recent lawsuits filed against the music mougal and breaking news just released as it related to Sean Combs defense team.“The Diddy Saga” is an Exposed: Scandalous Files of the Elite Series Podcast.#Diddy #seancombs #courtneyburgess #exposedpodcastfiles #podcast #exposed #seancombs #rap #cassie  Timestamps02:02 New Disturbing Allegations from a Jane Doe04:37 New Lawsuit from a John Doe08:22 The Plaintiff's Descent into Manipulation21:10 The Struggle for Escape23:51 Rising Tensions and Legal Battles26:17 Another Victim's Shocking Encounter28:57 The Dark Reality of the Industry31:13 A Troubling History with Combs33:24 Recent Developments in Diddy's Legal Issues37:59 Lawyer's Withdrawal from the Defense TeamLegal Note: This Case has not been criminally decided and all persons discussed in this podcast are assumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. The criminal or civil charges expressed in this podcast are taken from public record and not the direct opinions of the host or producers of this podcast.   For collaborations, promotions, or appearances email Jim at:  https://www.exposedpodcastfiles@gmail.com  Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/exposed-scandalous-files-of-the-elite--6073723/support.

Legal AF's Michael Popok provides urgent live briefing on late breaking events. Tonight, Popok examines MSNBC's firing of all of its diverse anchors, including Katie Phang and Joy Reid, to bend the knee to Trump; Federal Courts holding the line against Trump and Musk as an open MAGA rebellion has broken out internally against Musk; the hallowing out of American Values by Trump in his policies and laws, as Trump breaks the connection and breaches the social contract between US citizens and their government; an overview of the 92 cases and 34 injunctions and restraining orders against the Trump Administration as Plaintiffs groups like Attorneys General, public interest groups, and democratic lawyers, win at a 99% rate so far in courts, and so much more at the intersection of law and politics. Support Our Sponsors: Rubbish: For 35% off your order, head to https://RubbishHome.com and use code LEGALAF VIIA: Try VIIA Hemp! https://viia.co/legalaf and use code LEGALAF! Naked Wines: Join the Naked Wines community and head to https://NakedWines.com/legalaf for 6 bottles of wine for JUST $39.99 with shipping included MD Hearing: To get our $297 when you buy a PAIR offer, including a free charger, head to https://ShopMDHearing.com and use code LEGALAF. Remember to subscribe to ALL the MeidasTouch Network Podcasts: MeidasTouch: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/meidastouch-podcast Legal AF: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/legal-af MissTrial: https://meidasnews.com/tag/miss-trial The PoliticsGirl Podcast: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-politicsgirl-podcast The Influence Continuum: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-influence-continuum-with-dr-steven-hassan Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/mea-culpa-with-michael-cohen The Weekend Show: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/the-weekend-show Burn the Boats: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/burn-the-boats Majority 54: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/majority-54 Political Beatdown: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/political-beatdown On Democracy with FP Wellman: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/on-democracy-with-fpwellman Uncovered: https://www.meidastouch.com/tag/maga-uncovered Coalition of the Sane: https://meidasnews.com/tag/coalition-of-the-sane Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How can attorneys integrate leadership, strategy, and branding to build a thriving firm? In this episode of The Game Changing Attorney Podcast, Michael Mogill sits down with Jay Kelley, managing partner of Elk + Elk, to explore how one of Ohio's largest personal injury firms has evolved and flourished. Jay shares his unconventional journey into law, drawing from an early love of persuasive speaking he discovered through acting, and how this unique background has shaped his approach to becoming a trial attorney. Here's what you'll learn: How transformative life experiences can shape your practice and lead you to a fulfilling legal career The importance of building a firm culture that is both collaborative and capable of handling serious, complex cases Why strategic brand building and community engagement are crucial for long-term success in the legal industry Law firm leaders who truly want to elevate their impact need to go beyond just winning cases — they need to transform their firms from the inside out. This isn't just about marketing strategies or business development — it's about embodying authenticity, perseverance, and a relentless commitment to growth. ---- Show Notes:  00:00 – Introduction 02:16 – Jay Kelley's Journey: From Prosecutor to Plaintiff's Attorney 05:55 – The Power of Listening in the Courtroom 07:35 – Finding Purpose in Medical Malpractice Cases 09:07 – Balancing Being a Trial Attorney and a Law Firm Business Leader 12:46 – Branding a Law Firm: Standing Out in a Competitive Market 17:45 – Community Involvement and Brand Recall Strategies 25:50 – The Difference Between Brand Recall and Credibility 31:52 – Transitioning a Law Firm's Leadership and Legacy 42:56 – What It Means to Be a Game-Changing Attorney ---- Links & Resources: The Abbey Theatre Arthur M. Elk David J. Elk Cincinnati Reds Columbus Blue Jackets Cleveland Browns USO Dr. Kirk Wakefield Siri John P. O'Neil ---- Listening to this episode but want to watch it? Check it out on Spotify.  Do you love this podcast and want to see more game changing content? Subscribe to our YouTube channel. ---- Past guests on The Game Changing Attorney Podcast include David Goggins, John Morgan, Alex Hormozi, Randi McGinn, Kim Scott, Chris Voss, Kevin O'Leary, Laura Wasser, John Maxwell, Mark Lanier, Robert Greene, and many more. ---- If you enjoyed this episode, you may also like: Episode 174 — Joey Coleman — Never Lose a Client Again: Creating Memorable Experiences to Gain an Advocate for Life Episode 137 — Camille Vasquez — Authenticity is the Advantage Episode 119 — Jo-Ná Williams — The Entrepreneurial Attorney: Achieving Freedom by Serving Others

SummaryIn part two of this Q&A series, Zinda Law Group CEO and founder Jack Zinda answers your questions about trial vs. Settlement, budgeting & legal myths.Discussed in this Episode:Trial vs. settlement strategyBudgeting for growthBiggest legal mythTrial vs. Settlement Strategy“How do you decide when to push for trial versus taking a strong settlement offer?” -  Most offers never leave the table, so don't be afraid that the money will be reduced if you choose to go to trial. Be realistic and ask yourself if the initial offer is as much or more than a jury would award to your client. Would that amount of money make a meaningful difference in your client's life? If going to trial is something the client wants, make sure to explain the risks involved and additional case expenses that can be incurred. Budgeting for Growth“What percentage of my revenue should be reinvested into marketing and operations?”  - “First, you have to know where you're going if you're going to get there.” Jack lays out how Zinda Law makes marketing decisions and how you can decide what's best for you. If you're unsure how to make the numbers work, don't hesitate to ask someone or hire a professional to lay the map out for you. Biggest Legal Myth“What's the biggest misconception people have about personal injury law?”  - “What we do is easy.” If it were easy, everyone would do it. That's what makes personal injury lawyers so important. “What does working with clients in a personal injury case mean?” Jack talks about psychodramas and their importance to understanding the complexities of your client's life. “How much money do personal injury lawyers make?” Just because you see large numbers on billboards doesn't mean that that money gets paid out. A plaintiff lawyer can get a large verdict, but no actual dollar value is exchanged if the defendant can't pay it. You can reach Jack at:jack@zindalaw.com512-246-2224

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docxBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docxBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

We discuss recent aviation accidents, explore potential litigation, and consider changes to the U.S. Air Traffic Control system. Guest Erin Applebaum returns as our guest for this episode. Erin is a Partner in the aviation practice of Kreindler & Kreindler LLP, a New York law firm. She specializes in litigation for passengers who were injured or killed in general aviation accidents and commercial airline disasters. Erin previously joined us in Episode 831 Advocating for 737 MAX Crash Victims and Episode 777 Aviation Accident Litigation. We discuss the Delta Air Lines CRJ-900 regional jet crash at Toronto's Pearson Airport. Because this occurred the same day the episode was recorded, few verified facts were available. Erin also helps us consider the Washington National midair collision between an American Airlines regional jet and an Army Blackhawk helicopter. We look at the U.S. air traffic control system, including staffing needs, outdated systems, and alternatives such as privatization such as that used by other countries. Along the way, Erin explains litigation under the Montreal Convention and how aviation attorneys obtain clients. We look at the quality of communications between controllers and pilots, the types of altimeter types and implications for safety, traffic screens, the current status of the B737 MAX litigation, and the Federal Tort Claims Act. We also have thoughts on how to respond when people outside the industry ask, “Is it safe to fly?” Erin has devoted her career to advocating for justice and fighting for the advancement of aviation safety. She serves on the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee for the Ethiopian Airlines Flight 302 Boeing 737 MAX litigation. Erin is part of the legal team representing the 737 MAX crash victims in the federal criminal case against Boeing. Aviation News We used the following sources for our conversation. Note that some are behind a paywall and others require free registration. Black Hawk crew might not have heard crucial tower instruction, NTSB says Pilots got 100 collision warning at DCA From 1920s Thinking to Digital Autonomy: After 100 Years, It's Time To Rethink How Air Traffic Control Works US senators call for increased funding, staffing for air traffic control How Elon Musk Will Bring ATC Under Control, By Robert Poole, Reason Foundation. Victims' Families of Boeing Crash Ask New US Attorney General for Meeting on Criminal Plea Agreement Elon Musk Vows To Cut FAA's "Senseless" Supersonic Boom Noise Regulation Mentioned Hosts this Episode Max Flight, Rob Mark, our Main(e) Man Micah, and Max Trescott.

Is P&G's sustainability messaging misleading consumers? A new class action lawsuit accuses Procter & Gamble of greenwashing, alleging that its "Keep Forests as Forests" campaign and "Protect-Grow-Restore" promises don't hold up under scrutiny. The case claims that P&G's Charmin toilet paper is sourced from clear-cut boreal forests, with replanting efforts creating so-called "Frankenforests"—single-species tree plantations treated with chemical herbicides. The lawsuit also challenges P&G's use of FSC and Rainforest Alliance logos, arguing that they mislead consumers about the company's sustainability efforts. Plaintiffs cite violations of the FTC's Green Guides, shareholder criticism, and competitor practices as key factors in their claim. Read the full analysis here: https://www.kelleydrye.com/viewpoints/blogs/ad-law-access/p-g-accused-of-greenwashing-and-creating-frankenforests#:~:text=Earlier%20this%20month%2C%20a%20group,following%20through%20with%20its%20sustainable Hosted by: Simone Roach Blog by: Katie Rogers & Gonzalo Mon Stay Informed on Green Marketing & Sustainability Claims: - Ad Law Access Blog: https://www.kelleydrye.com/subscribe - Ad Law News Newsletter: https://www.kelleydrye.com/subscribe - Advertising & Privacy Law Resource Center: https://www.kelleydrye.com/advertising-and-privacy-law - All Kelley Drye Ad Law Links: https://linktr.ee/KelleyDryeAdLaw - Kelley Drye Team: https://www.kelleydrye.com/practices/advertising-and-marketing

When asked about the Hare Krishnas, most people will conjure images of dancing, chanting people with colourful robes and joyful dispositions. Members of the general public, whom Hare Krishnas refer to as 'karmis', may have encountered devotees through their vegetarian food offerings at music festivals or city restaurants. Their anti-LGBTQI+ and patriarchal beliefs, as well as the darker aspects of their history – including horrifying stories of abuse, and even murders – come as a surprise to many.Full research sources listed here. You can support us on Patreon. Sarah Steel's debut book Do As I Say is available on audiobook now.Links:Srila Prabhupada's arrival in the USA — by Ramai Swami, 27 September 2021Authoritarian Culture and Child Abuse in ISKCON — by Nori J. Muster, Cultic Studies Review, 3(1), 2004Children of ISKCON vs. ISKCON complaint — Plaintiffs' original petition in the Dallas lawsuit, Surrealist.org, filed 25 October 2001How I Once Was a Hare Krishna… — by Christopher Fici, Medium, 7 January 2023Holy Cow, Swami — documentary by Jacob Young, 1996History — ISKCON Child Protection Office, accessed January 2025Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement: 1971-1986 — by E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein, ISKCON Communications Journal, Vol. 6, #1, June 1998Children of ISKCON vs. ISKCON Timeline — Surrealist.org (Nori Muster's website), accessed January 2025Tortured Souls — by Mark Donald, Dallas Observer, 6 December 2001Dial Om for Murder — by John Hubner & Lindsey Gruson, Rolling Stone, Issue 497, 1987Religion: Control Stressed at Krishna Children's School — by Eleanor Blau, The New York Times, 25 November 1973Why ISKCON Needs to be on Guard Against “Cultic Behavior” — by Anuttama Dasa, ISKCON News, 26 July 2024The Krishna Cult — by Paul Ford, Mad After Krishna, 1994 Subscribe and support the production of this independent podcast, and you can access early + ad-free episodes at https://plus.acast.com/s/lets-talk-about-sects. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When asked about the Hare Krishnas, most people will conjure images of dancing, chanting people with colourful robes and joyful dispositions. Members of the general public, whom Hare Krishnas refer to as 'karmis', may have encountered devotees through their vegetarian food offerings at music festivals or city restaurants. Their anti-LGBTQI+ and patriarchal beliefs, as well as the darker aspects of their history – including horrifying stories of abuse, and even murders – come as a surprise to many.Part 2 is already available to Patreon supporters, and will be released on the main feed on Wednesday 19 February. Full research sources listed here.Links:Srila Prabhupada's arrival in the USA — by Ramai Swami, 27 September 2021Authoritarian Culture and Child Abuse in ISKCON — by Nori J. Muster, Cultic Studies Review, 3(1), 2004Children of ISKCON vs. ISKCON complaint — Plaintiffs' original petition in the Dallas lawsuit, Surrealist.org, filed 25 October 2001How I Once Was a Hare Krishna… — by Christopher Fici, Medium, 7 January 2023Holy Cow, Swami — documentary by Jacob Young, 1996History — ISKCON Child Protection Office, accessed January 2025Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement: 1971-1986 — by E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein, ISKCON Communications Journal, Vol. 6, #1, June 1998Children of ISKCON vs. ISKCON Timeline — Surrealist.org (Nori Muster's website), accessed January 2025Tortured Souls — by Mark Donald, Dallas Observer, 6 December 2001Dial Om for Murder — by John Hubner & Lindsey Gruson, Rolling Stone, Issue 497, 1987Religion: Control Stressed at Krishna Children's School — by Eleanor Blau, The New York Times, 25 November 1973Why ISKCON Needs to be on Guard Against “Cultic Behavior” — by Anuttama Dasa, ISKCON News, 26 July 2024The Krishna Cult — by Paul Ford, Mad After Krishna, 1994 Subscribe and support the production of this independent podcast, and you can access early + ad-free episodes at https://plus.acast.com/s/lets-talk-about-sects. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In part one of a three episode series, Zinda Law Group CEO and founder, Jack Zinda answers your questions about managing your law firm. Discussed in this Episode:Scaling a firmFirm CultureLeadership skillsScaling a Firm“I've hit a plateau with my firm's growth. What strategies do you recommend to scale beyond the 7-figure mark?” -  The first question you need to ask yourself is “what number am I trying to get to? There are dozens of ways to scale a law firm but if you don't have a firm number or end goal, you won't be able to build a map to get there. Firm Culture“How do I build a culture where my team is as invested in the firm's success as I am?” - The short answer is: you can't. No one will be as invested as the founder and that is because of a myriad of reasons including the financial commitments and pressures to succeed. That being said, there are still ways to improve the level to which your team cares. Some questions to ask yourself are: What is it about your firm that makes you special? Do your employees enjoy their work? What are their struggles? Jack's final word of advice: “Don't have jerks at your company”.Leadership Skills“What's the #1 leadership skill that helped you grow your firm?” - Learning to communicate complicated messages in a simple way is the most effective way to keep your team motivated and moving forward. Before you can even do that you need to go back to the beginning and make sure that you have your map laid out and ready to be communicated. Resources:The E-Myth by Michael E. GerberYou can reach Jack at:jack@zindalaw.com512-246-2224

This week on Blocked and Reported, Jesse is joined by our furry friend Tracing Woodgrains/Jack Despain Zhou to discuss the rationalist trans murder cult. Plus, revisiting the DEI scandal at the FAA.zizians.infoEffective Altruism's Problems Go Beyond Sam Bankman-Fried - BloombergNet Negative – SinceriouslyGood Group and Pasek's Doom – SinceriouslyContainment Causes Suicidality | Mental EngineeringJay Leo Winterford (Jacob Ray Pekarek) Obituary - Estes Park, COin your dreamsMystery in Sonoma County after arrests of protesters in Guy Fawkes masks and robesA community alert about Ziz. Police investigations, violence, and… | by SefaShapiro | MediumJack LaSota Obituary (2022) - Fairbanks, AK - Daily News-MinerGWEN DANIELSON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SONOMA, CALIFORNIATwo Alleged Squatters Charged In Vallejo Death of Friend and Sword Attack on LandlordSuspects in killings of Vallejo witness, Vermont border patrol agent connected by marriage license, extreme ideologyChester Heights Murder: Pennsylvania State Police say Delaware County couple homicide was not 'random act of violence' - 6abc PhiladelphiaPLUM OF DISCORD — I Became a Full-time Internet Pest and May Not... This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.blockedandreported.org/subscribe

In Case No. 1:24-cv-07975-AT, Defendant Shawn Carter, professionally known as Jay-Z, has filed a Memorandum of Law supporting his motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Carter argues that the Plaintiff's allegations lack sufficient legal basis and fail to meet the necessary pleading standards required to proceed with the case. He contends that the complaint does not present concrete facts to substantiate the claims made against him, rendering the lawsuit legally deficient.Furthermore, Carter emphasizes that the Plaintiff's complaint is not only baseless but also frivolous, warranting dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11. He asserts that the allegations are unfounded and appear to be an attempt to misuse the legal system, potentially causing unwarranted harm to his reputation. Carter's memorandum seeks both the dismissal of the complaint and the imposition of sanctions against the Plaintiff for filing a meritless lawsuit.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Motion to Dismiss FAC (SDNY) (15549242_8) (004).docx

OA1120- This episode was first published on our sister show, Gavel Gavel, and has been made available at no charge for our wonderful Opening Arguments patrons! Folks, we and you deserve a little treat. And let me tell you, this is a treat. Mwuah! Chef's kiss. Here's a triple episode for ya! Rudy Giuliani is such a piece of shit that the last real lawyers he could find quit. And so, enter... some guy from Staten Island. He gave us, and the world, truly one of the stupidest, worst written legal documents in recorded history. And in such a serious case, as well! We spend the entirety of this recording digging into it. Come for the weird typos and endless sentences, stay for the lecture on the evils of liberal democracy and wildly unnecessary references to the judge's father!  Superstar public defender Liz Skeen joins us to draw from her past life as a NY litigator to provide the local and legal context for… whatever this is. “Defendant's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion to Hold Defendant in Civil Contempt and Impose Sanctions,” Ruby Freeman & Wanshae Moss v. Rudolph W. Giuliani (12/19/2024)(SDNY)(today's reading) Plaintiff's summary judgment brief (10/2/24) Plaintiffs' request for sanctions (10/29/24)   Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do! To support the show (and lose the ads!), please pledge at patreon.com/law!